-> JC> -> JC> -> If so, it's only because a "critical mass" of HIV-infec
-> JC> gay
-> JC> -> JC> -> aren't present in those countries.
-> JC> -> JC> -> Until a "critical mass" of people in a given region hav
-> JC> -> JC> particular
-> JC> -> JC> -> communicable disease, it's unlikely that any uninfected
-> JC> person
-> JC> -> JC> will
-> JC> -> JC> -> come into contact with an infected person as long as he
-> JC> stays
-> JC> -> JC> -> that region.
-> JC> -> JC>
-> JC> -> JC> I am not sure of the concept you are trying to get across
-> JC> here.
-> JC> ->
-> JC> -> If someone has sex with every man and woman in a country where
-> JC> nobody
-> JC> -> has gonorrhea, he faces no risk of contracting gonorrhea.
-> JC> -> It's the same way for AIDS.  Until a "critical mass" of people
-> JC> a
-> JC> -> region are HIV+, an epidemic is just impossible.
-> JC>
-> JC> So you are saying no one "has it" so no one can be exposed>>>>
->
-> Yes.
->
-> JC> Interesting concept...for China.
->
-> Many Chinese live their whole lives (other than army service) in a
-> 25-mile radius of where they were born.  If nobody else in that area
-> is HIV+, they have very low risk of getting HIV even if they sleep
-> with everyone in the area!
->
-> Thanks again.  I think that I am starting to get the concept that you
are trying to project.
Still I cna not underastand why anyone would want to cut a child when
the procedure show little if any medical benefits.
James
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------